Keep in mind they were using this picture to remind them of who she was...

Also keep in mind how easy it would be to mistake one of the other tapas children for Madeleine...Miguel Matias was convinced Madeleine was at the Paraiso, when we know it was not Madeleine he saw, but the other tapas children.

This is a list of the ONLY people that I can find that claim to have seen Madeleine. Not ONE of them (apart from Fatima) proves that she was seen imo.

Maria M A Jose - Tapas Cook Claims she saw Madeleine when she attended the creche next to the tapas but Madeleine went to the creche 10 minutes away. - Mistaken Identity?

Luisa Ana de Noronha de Azevedo Coutinho ( Receptionist) Saw 'Madeleine' when ROB booked the tapas but may have been mistaken as Ella and Madeleine are similar (as can be seen in pics on link posted above) Bookngs were made in the morning and Ella did not attend creche that day so may have been with her father. - Mistaken Identity?

Bridget O'Donnell'All pink and pretty'. It was not the Lobsters mini tennis that she describes. Madeleine played another day. - Non Specific - Mistaken Identity

Miguel MatiasSaw Madeleine dancing with her daddy at the Paraiso but CCTV footage proves he was incorrect and mistakenly thought another tapas child was Madeleine. - Mistaken Identity

Statements that 'allude' to seeing Madeleine but not specific:

Georgina Jackson : 'it being that the child also had a class' 'she was among a group of children'......Does that statement CONFIRM that Madeleine was there, she remembers her specifically, or is it only that she presumes she was there because of the records? - Not Specific

The Boyds Their son supposedly played with Madeleine on the waterslide on May 3rd. The only possible timing would be when Madeleine was 'apparently' at the poolside but the Boyds claim Gerry was playing tennis...Not a credible 'sighting' for many reasons.

Catriona Baker - Her early statement and Rogatory has so many contradictions and discrepancies along with a personal visit to the McCanns in November 2007 just before the Rogatory interviews deems her statements impossible to be classified as credible. - Not credible

Charlotte Pennington Many discrepancies and contradictions.- Not credible proof of seeing Madeleine.

Elisa Dias Romao - Remembers seeing them leave for lunch always between 12.30pm -1.00pm (Creche records show they left every day between 12.10 and 12.30pm) - Not credible - Mistaken Identity?

Thanks to the bewilderingly different photos that have been issued - some of which I doubt are of the same child - I don't think that anyone would be able to state categorically that they had seen Madeleine!

Not Born Yesterday

Platinum Poster

Number of posts : 6697Age : 103Location : Over the hills and far awayWarning :

Why do you think that so many people may have possibly mistaken Madeleine from the photos seen after she went missing? Why would the Boyd family not recognise a photo of Madeleine from the girl who they said they believed their son played with? Every single one of them people you've listed believe they saw Madeleine, is it really plausible to disregard all of their statements?

I agree with some of the photo's I have seen previously, they look similar to Madeleine. However, I am good at recognising faces from seeing people once and who's to say some of the people listed are also not good at recognising faces?

If however, like you ask, did anyone not actually see her on their holiday. What do you think is the reason?

Why do you think that so many people may have possibly mistaken Madeleine from the photos seen after she went missing? Why would the Boyd family not recognise a photo of Madeleine from the girl who they said they believed their son played with? Every single one of them people you've listed believe they saw Madeleine, is it really plausible to disregard all of their statements?

I agree with some of the photo's I have seen previously, they look similar to Madeleine. However, I am good at recognising faces from seeing people once and who's to say some of the people listed are also not good at recognising faces?

If however, like you ask, did anyone not actually see her on their holiday. What do you think is the reason?

I believe there is a question about why Gerry had to go to Rothley to collect a pillow from Madeleine's bed there. Do you find it odd or not that a bed that Madeleine had been sleeping in for nearly a week didn't have any hair, saliva, or any other trace of her to be tested for DNA?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________"You can run on for a long time, Run on for a long time, Run on for a long time, Sooner or later God'll cut you down." (Johnny Cash)

If that is the case, yes it is completely bizarre that there wasn't any form of Madeleine's DNA in her bed. What is your conclusion to this? Did he have to go back to Rothley because they had not one thing they could hand over to the police for DNA sampling or was it because he was asked to go home and collect something by the police? Do you think it plausible to dismiss every statement made by all the people who claim to have seen Madeleine while she was on holiday?

Then I would have sworn that this was "Maddie" or at the very least, some sort of close relation. Not only to Maddie, but to Kate. They all have the same chin, the same jaw set, the same smile, in fact the whole lower half of the face is identical. This is very strange! Either these girls are "related" in some way, or the photos of "Maddie" are not of Maddie at all. Now why would that be???

Then I would have sworn that this was "Maddie" or at the very least, some sort of close relation. Not only to Maddie, but to Kate. They all have the same chin, the same jaw set, the same smile, in fact the whole lower half of the face is identical. This is very strange! Either these girls are "related" in some way, or the photos of "Maddie" are not of Maddie at all. Now why would that be???

Hello Iris!

They smile differently, Madeleine lips go down, the other goes up. The nose is a different shape. Not to mention the most important thing to look at is the eyes and she has glasses on so we cannot see a thing!! Though they look similar, I can certainly tell the difference between the two!!

Then I would have sworn that this was "Maddie" or at the very least, some sort of close relation. Not only to Maddie, but to Kate. They all have the same chin, the same jaw set, the same smile, in fact the whole lower half of the face is identical. This is very strange! Either these girls are "related" in some way, or the photos of "Maddie" are not of Maddie at all. Now why would that be???

Hello Iris!

They smile differently, Madeleine lips go down, the other goes up. The nose is a different shape. Not to mention the most important thing to look at is the eyes and she has glasses on so we cannot see a thing!! Though they look similar, I can certainly tell the difference between the two!!

As there is no doubt both girl are 'similar' then how any independant witness could be certain they saw Madeleine prior to the abduction from a photograph shown to them after the event and be 100% certain would take some doing........................ I just don't think that is possible.................................

I believe there is a question about why Gerry had to go to Rothley to collect a pillow from Madeleine's bed there. Do you find it odd or not that a bed that Madeleine had been sleeping in for nearly a week didn't have any hair, saliva, or any other trace of her to be tested for DNA?

This puzzles me to Anna. Do we know for a fact if Gerry was 'sent' back to the Uk to bring back a source of DNA or was that a cover for him picking up other things. Did not photo's and the police manuals - No Stone Unturned book turn up after this visit?

Then I would have sworn that this was "Maddie" or at the very least, some sort of close relation. Not only to Maddie, but to Kate. They all have the same chin, the same jaw set, the same smile, in fact the whole lower half of the face is identical. This is very strange! Either these girls are "related" in some way, or the photos of "Maddie" are not of Maddie at all. Now why would that be???

Hello Iris!

They smile differently, Madeleine lips go down, the other goes up. The nose is a different shape. Not to mention the most important thing to look at is the eyes and she has glasses on so we cannot see a thing!! Though they look similar, I can certainly tell the difference between the two!!

As there is no doubt both girl are 'similar' then how any independant witness could be certain they saw Madeleine prior to the abduction from a photograph shown to them after the event and be 100% certain would take some doing........................ I just don't think that is possible.................................

Unless the other child wore glasses at all times I have to disagree. To me they are similar to a point, and without glasses on wouldn't you be able to see that their eyes, the shape, colour are different? If a child played with my son for a while, I would be certain I could pick out the child.

Then I would have sworn that this was "Maddie" or at the very least, some sort of close relation. Not only to Maddie, but to Kate. They all have the same chin, the same jaw set, the same smile, in fact the whole lower half of the face is identical. This is very strange! Either these girls are "related" in some way, or the photos of "Maddie" are not of Maddie at all. Now why would that be???

Hello Iris!

They smile differently, Madeleine lips go down, the other goes up. The nose is a different shape. Not to mention the most important thing to look at is the eyes and she has glasses on so we cannot see a thing!! Though they look similar, I can certainly tell the difference between the two!!

As there is no doubt both girl are 'similar' then how any independant witness could be certain they saw Madeleine prior to the abduction from a photograph shown to them after the event and be 100% certain would take some doing........................ I just don't think that is possible.................................

Unless the other child wore glasses at all times I have to disagree. To me they are similar to a point, and without glasses on wouldn't you be able to see that their eyes, the shape, colour are different? ]If a child played with my son for a while, I would be certain I could pick out the child ]

These sightings were just that - a Sighting - no need to look into eyes, stare at mouths and measure chins........... a cursory glance would be all that was required.......................... I still don't think it possible that these people could be 100% certain it was Madeleine they saw.......................

I appreciate that some of them were mere sightings and to someone who had no particular interest in the girls may get them mixed up. What about the Boyd family? They stated that she played with their son, that was more then a sighting. Her son interacted with her so surely you would think she would notice the difference if another little girls face came up on a photo as Madeleine. I think we will have to agree to disagree as I cannot comprehend the idea that every single one of them people would get it wrong, maybe a few but certainly not all.

Why do you think that so many people may have possibly mistaken Madeleine from the photos seen after she went missing? Why would the Boyd family not recognise a photo of Madeleine from the girl who they said they believed their son played with? Every single one of them people you've listed believe they saw Madeleine, is it really plausible to disregard all of their statements?

I agree with some of the photo's I have seen previously, they look similar to Madeleine. However, I am good at recognising faces from seeing people once and who's to say some of the people listed are also not good at recognising faces?

If however, like you ask, did anyone not actually see her on their holiday. What do you think is the reason?

Like everyone else, I believed that Madeleine was seen during the holidays as there were so many people that claimed to have seen her.

I attempted to try to find out which ones were credible, hopefully leading to the last day that she was seen with a fair amount of certainty...

As I started to collate them and then scrutinise each one I realised that apart from Fatima da Silva who saw Madeleine and the family outside the apartment as they were probably heading up to lunch at the Paynes (I checked her statement for he work times to see if she actually was finished work at hat time as she said...and it was correct.) there was NOT ONE statement that had a similar degree of credibility.

I thought that the possibility of something happening to Madeleine prior to Thursday would be impossible but after reading all the statements, every one (except Fatima) allows for doubt. Some were very obviously mistaken.

This is the list of everyone that 'saw' Madeleine during the holiday according to their statements.

Cecilia Dias Firmino - Receptionist at Millenium - described a shy Madeleine and saw them on days they were not at restaurant. - Therefore, not proof that she saw Madeleine...She may have seen one of the other tapas children

Jeronimo Salcedes - Tapas Barman - Admits to not being able to recognise if it was Madeleine.

Maria M A Jose - Tapas Cook - Described seeing Madeleine every lunchtime in the tapas next to the creche Madeleine attended, but Madeleine did not go to that creche so she was mistaken with which child she saw.

Luisa Ana de Noronha de Azevedo Coutinho ( Receptionist) - Claims to have seen Madeleine with ROB but his daughter was not in the creche that morning and looks very similar to Madeleine so likely mistaken.

Georgina Jackson - Tennis instructor - Was non specific about seeing Madeleine...only that she was part of the group for that morning.

Bridget O'Donnell - Jez Wilkins partner - Claimed 'all pretty in pink' for the mini tennis with the Sharks on Thursday...Madeleine's group played on Tuesday, so she was mistaken that Madeleine may have been there.

Miguel Matias - Owner of Paraiso - Was convinced he saw Madeleine dancing with her daddy and on his shoulders but we KNOW Madeleine was not there...he mistakenly thought another child was Madeleine.

The Boyds Their son supposedly played with Madeleine on the waterslide on May 3rd - They made no statement, just a magazine article that has many discrepancies about its credibility which I can explain further if necessary.

Catriona Baker - Non credible with her statement riddled with discrepancies as well as her trip to visit the McCanns in Rothley does not help with credibility.

Charlotte Pennington - Already accepted as being questionable with many contradictions and discrepancies.

Elisa Dias Romao - Claimed seeing Madeleine at times she was not there.(according to creche records)

very interesting observations on the photographs. I think its possible that many people think theyve seenMadeleine, just look at the sightings, and those people have stated their certainty, even trtying to speak to said child, so i agree it is entirely possible. Can anyone remember when the photos of i think it was DPayne and Robert Murat were shown side by side in the paper, they were like twins.

Then I would have sworn that this was "Maddie" or at the very least, some sort of close relation. Not only to Maddie, but to Kate. They all have the same chin, the same jaw set, the same smile, in fact the whole lower half of the face is identical. This is very strange! Either these girls are "related" in some way, or the photos of "Maddie" are not of Maddie at all. Now why would that be???

Hello Iris!

They smile differently, Madeleine lips go down, the other goes up. The nose is a different shape. Not to mention the most important thing to look at is the eyes and she has glasses on so we cannot see a thing!! Though they look similar, I can certainly tell the difference between the two!!

As there is no doubt both girl are 'similar' then how any independant witness could be certain they saw Madeleine prior to the abduction from a photograph shown to them after the event and be 100% certain would take some doing........................ I just don't think that is possible.................................

Unless the other child wore glasses at all times I have to disagree. To me they are similar to a point, and without glasses on wouldn't you be able to see that their eyes, the shape, colour are different? If a child played with my son for a while, I would be certain I could pick out the child.

I am sure you would when seeing them side by side together. But remembering back unless you had direct and close up contact with the child (and had proof that it was Madeleine) then I would imagine you could be easily mistaken in which child you had actually seen.

It has often taken me weeks to differentiate between two people that I have been working with, and often they are no more than just vaguely similar.

Granted, I am not the world's best observer of people...I sat on one side of a bar, when a chap asked me how I was doing...I replied by telling him I was fine and asked how he was. I then asked him if I knew him....The pub was in uproar when he answered 'You should do...I was married to you for 15 years!' (he was against the light of the window...my excuse and I'm sticking to it!)

Seriously though, I couldn't tell my children's friends apart when they were all playing together and I will refrain from telling you the MANY other times I have a blank look when I should know the person!

It's tougher than we imagine to take in details when there is not a need (for me anyway!)

And... as Hideho says (several times) it's not just about whether these people really did or didn't see Madeleine, it's about whether or not it could have been Madeleine they'd seen and as she shows us in painstaking detail, in many of the examples provided it patently couldn't have been.

The eldest Payne child has dark brown hair, incidentally, as evidenced by other photos of her (sitting in the twins' buggy, for example, the shuttle bus footage or the steps of the plane). The black and white photo makes it less clear that there is a huge physical difference between Madeleine and this child.

So Kate was relaxing on a sunlounger and watching Madeleine whizzing down a waterslide while Gerry was playing tennis?

Statements claim that they went down to the pool around 1.30pm and the picture was taken at 2.29pm. Rachael and Jane were playing tennis at this time according to their statements but Rachael claims to have seen Madeleine for the last time while she was playing mini tennis with no mention of the McCanns or Madeleine in this area at that time. (never mind several other discrepancies from Rachael regarding that)

Jane claims that Madeleine shouted through the fence.

Gerry was not known to be playing tennis at this time and I have yet to see a picture of the waterslide that Madeleine spent time on, prior to going to the play area for footbal.

I am not saying that the Boyds did not meet Madeleine but this article does not offer itself as proof that they did! imo